RFK Jr. targets key health panel for overhaul, citing ideological grounds

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is reportedly gearing up to clean house at the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Kennedy is said to be planning a complete replacement of all 16 members of this influential panel, which plays a critical role in deciding which cancer screenings and preventive measures insurance must cover, due to their past statements and recommendations that he views as overly ideological, as the Daily Wire reports.

This isn’t Kennedy’s first rodeo in shaking up federal health panels. Just last month, he replaced every member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a key vaccine advisory group, citing concerns over conflicts of interest. His goal? Restoring public trust in health policy.

Kennedy’s prior moves set the stage

Let’s rewind a bit — Kennedy’s overhaul of ACIP saw all 17 panelists shown the door. The new eight-member panel, handpicked by Kennedy, has already made waves with votes to recommend a shot protecting infants from the dangerous RSV virus and to push for flu shots without the mercury-based preservative thimerosal.

Kennedy didn’t mince words on ACIP’s past, stating it had “never recommended against a vaccine — even those which were later withdrawn for safety reasons.” Well, if that’s not a red flag, what is? His critique points to a system long overdue for scrutiny.

He also noted that ACIP “failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women.” That’s a serious charge, and it’s no surprise Kennedy is moving fast to cement new recommendations. The childhood vaccination schedule is next on ACIP’s chopping block, and critics are already lining up with concerns.

USPSTF under fire over language

Now, back to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force — Kennedy’s latest target. Sources told The Wall Street Journal that he plans to oust every single member over what he sees as “woke” commentary that’s crept into their work. And let’s just say, some of their language choices have raised eyebrows.

For instance, the panel has pointed to “racial discrimination” as a risk factor for anxiety in children and teens. Members have also used terms like “pregnant persons” instead of “pregnant women” in their materials. While intentions may be to sound inclusive, many see this as prioritizing ideology over clarity.

Then there’s the publication on breastfeeding, where the task force highlighted the “lasting psychological impact” of “enslaved Black women being forced to act as wet nurses.” It’s a historical point, no doubt, but critics argue it’s a detour from the panel’s core mission of health recommendations. Is this really the place for such narratives?

Critics weigh in on ideological drift

The American Conservative, as cited by the Wall Street Journal, didn’t hold back, slamming the task force for embracing what they call “left-wing ideological orthodoxy.” That’s a hefty accusation, but when health panels start sounding more like sociology seminars, you can see why some folks are frustrated.

On the flip side, HHS has tried to keep things diplomatic, stating that Kennedy “looks forward to working with the USPSTF to improve public health.” Nice sentiment, but actions speak louder than words, and a full replacement doesn’t exactly scream collaboration. Turns out, a polite statement can’t paper over a major shakeup.

Let’s be clear: the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force holds immense power over what preventive care gets covered by insurance. If their recommendations are swayed by trendy buzzwords rather than hard science, that’s a problem for every American footing the bill. Kennedy’s move, while drastic, might just force a much-needed reality check.

What’s next for health policy?

So, where does this leave us? The Daily Wire has reached out to HHS for further comment on the task force situation, but the silence so far suggests we’ll be watching actions, not press releases, for answers. Kennedy’s track record shows he’s not afraid to swing the axe when he smells agenda-driven policy.

For many conservatives, this is a refreshing push against a progressive tilt in health bureaucracies that has gone unchecked for too long. Yet, even critics of “woke” culture must ask: Will new appointees bring balance, or just trade one bias for another? That’s the million-dollar question.

At the end of the day, health policy should be about saving lives, not scoring cultural points — on either side. Kennedy’s reforms, whether with ACIP or the task force, will be judged by whether they deliver trust and results, not just headlines. Here’s hoping this shakeup is more than a political stunt, but a step toward sanity in a system that desperately needs it.